After two horrific mass shootings that took the lives of at least 29 people and injured dozens others in less than 24 hours, the editorial board of the right-leaning New York Post is now calling for President Trump — whom the board describes as “a pragmatic centrist” on gun control — to take action against “weapons of war.”
“Two mass shootings within 24 hours in El Paso and Dayton, days after the Garlic Festival killings,” the editorial begins. “Three months after Virginia Beach, six months after Aurora, nine months after Thousand Oaks, 10 months after Tree of Life, 15 months after Santa Fe High School, 18 months after Parkland and in the wake of larger horrors like the Vegas concert and Pulse nightclub massacres.”
Describing the nation as “terrified” and feeling that “the country is spinning out of control,” the Post’s editors turn directly to Trump, stressing that he is “positioned to assuage that fear.” The editors’ hope is that Trump’s pragmatism will override his desire to appeal to his pro-Second Amendment supporters.
“On gun control, you are a pragmatic centrist, someone who knows there is a vast majority of Americans who are not to the extreme left or right on this issue. They just want the killings to stop,” they write.
“Yes, we know the president regularly praises the Second Amendment and received the National Rifle Association’s support in the 2016 race. But the Second Amendment leaves ample room for regulating gun rights, just as every other constitutional right has its limits,” the editorial continues. “And Trump has sneered at others for being afraid of the NRA when it comes to passing common-sense gun laws. He’d surely have rather had Congress pass a law banning bump stocks, although his administration got it done eventually through executive action.”
Noting that the NRA is currently facing serious internal problems, the editors insist that it would be “far wiser” to appeal to those Americans who own guns for hunting or self-defense but are still “appalled by the endless string of mass shootings” than an embattled association.
The first step, they suggest, is “the return of an assault weapons ban.”
Acknowledging that “assault weapon” is not a clearly defined class of guns and that studies indicate that the previous ban (1994 to 2004) had only “a limited impact,” the board says this time the assault weapons ban “should be better written, with a clear definition focused on factors like firepower — rate of fire, muzzle velocity, etc. — not on cosmetic features.”
As for Second Amendment protections, the board maintains that the Supreme Court has determined that the amendment only guards Americans’ rights to own “guns in common use,” which, they say, “doesn’t cover the semiautomatic weapons regularly used only in mass shootings.”
Along with a more clearly written assault weapons ban, the board calls for improved background checks, more effective means of addressing mental health issues, and encouraging each state to pass red-flag laws, with a federal version enacted as well. (Read the Post’s editorial here.)
Related: Trump Hits Back At Media After Accusations Of Inciting Two Mass Shootings